Skip to main content
HomeSpecialistsBusinessBlogContact us
العربيةFor care providersBook a session
Skip to article text

How to read news about psychology studies

Alanoud AlturkiMedical review: Tatmeen team7 min read
عدسة مكبرة فوق رسوم لأشخاص، وبجانبها رسم لامرأة ترتدي معطفًا ووشاحًا أزرق.
Article contents
  1. 1. Does the study describe a pattern across people or reveal something about one person?
  2. 2. Did researchers find an association or test an intervention?
  3. 3. What improved: people's lives or a laboratory measurement?
  4. 4. Who took part, and do they resemble the people the story talks about?
  5. 5. Does the result describe an experience or decide what I should value?
  6. A card for the next story you read
  7. Frequently Asked Questions
  8. Sources and references
  9. Writer and reviewer

“One question reveals your personality.” “Being aware of your emotions makes you healthier.” “Relationships matter more than success.” A real study may sit behind a headline, but the sentence being shared is not always what the research established. Before using a story like this to judge yourself or someone else, ask who took part, what the researchers measured, and what their findings allow us to conclude.

You do not need to understand every equation in a paper. Start by separating the result from the advice the news writer added. The examples below come from studies published between 2010 and 2015. They illustrate that gap rather than offer new treatment recommendations.

1. Does the study describe a pattern across people or reveal something about one person?

A 2010 paper by Wood and colleagues found associations between how participants rated others1 and some of their own traits and wellbeing measures. Its three studies involved US university settings, multiple ratings of several people, and other measures. It did not test a single question for diagnosing the person in front of you.

A statistical pattern can help researchers understand relationships between characteristics. It cannot give you a ready-made explanation for a colleague who says, “I don't trust anyone.” They may be referring to one experience or exaggerating. That sentence alone cannot tell you which explanation fits, or justify giving them a mental health label.

Instead of trying to name their personality, ask what they mean: “Do you mean someone in particular? What happened?” If their behaviour harms you, through insults or threats, for example, you can respond to that behaviour and set clear boundaries without diagnosing them. You do not need to prove a hidden trait before taking what is happening seriously.

2. Did researchers find an association or test an intervention?

Loucks and colleagues studied 382 US adults. Higher mindfulness questionnaire scores were associated with some health indicators2, including physical activity and not smoking. This was a comparison at one point in time. Participants were not assigned mindfulness training to see whether their health then improved, so the study cannot establish that mindfulness caused the differences.

An association means that two things appeared together in the data. Other explanations or unmeasured factors may be involved. An intervention study asks a different question: what happens when researchers offer a programme and compare its results with another group? Good design and random assignment help examine causation3, while still leaving limits concerning participants and measurements.

Watch the verb in the story. Has “associated with” become “causes” or “guarantees”? That change needs evidence, even when the advice sounds reasonable. Having a continuing health problem does not mean you failed to pay attention to your emotions.

3. What improved: people's lives or a laboratory measurement?

Carlson's team analysed data from 88 Canadian women after breast cancer treatment, comparing mindfulness, group support and a limited programme. They found a trend toward maintaining telomere length4—the protective ends of chromosomes—but the difference did not reach their specified statistical significance threshold. The study did not establish telomere lengthening or a longer lifespan.

When you hear about “changes at the cellular level,” ask what that means for a patient. Did the study measure sleep, ability to work or disease recurrence? A biological marker can be important for research without automatically proving a benefit people experience. An inconclusive result does not prove a programme has no benefit either. It means this particular claim needs stronger evidence.

Do not change a prescribed treatment based on a story about a biological marker. Save the study link and ask your care provider5 what it actually measured and whether its findings apply to your circumstances.

4. Who took part, and do they resemble the people the story talks about?

Spinazzola and colleagues' 2014 study analysed data from 5,616 US children and adolescents referred for trauma services who had maltreatment histories. Psychological maltreatment was associated with substantial problems6; several indicators were similar to or higher than in other maltreatment groups. This compared assessment data. It did not follow every child for 12 years.

The finding matters for understanding psychological harm. It does not describe all children, rank every person's suffering, or by itself explain the cause of an adult's current difficulties.

If past experiences still affect your sleep, relationships or daily life, you can discuss them with a qualified professional. You do not have to compare your experience with something worse, or prove it ranks first in a hierarchy of harm, for it to deserve attention. Looking for a helpful explanation is different from deciding that one study explains your whole life.

5. Does the result describe an experience or decide what I should value?

In four US studies, Jaremka and colleagues found that relationship-centred experiences often had a strong emotional impact on participants7. They measured recalled experiences and ratings of their impact. They did not establish that everyone should care less about work or income.

This finding might prompt a useful question: “Am I giving the people who matter to me the time I want to give them?” It does not answer for you. Work can mean financial security, independence or caring for a family. Using research does not require turning a description of some people's experiences into a moral rule for everyone.

A card for the next story you read

Question What to look for
Who took part? Participant numbers, ages, country and how they were selected.
What did researchers do? Observation, a questionnaire or record analysis, or an intervention with a comparison group?
What did they actually measure? Experiences, symptoms or behaviour, or a biological marker that cannot alone establish a health benefit?
What limits the finding? Follow-up length, uncertainty, and whether it concerns a group or an individual.
What did the story add? A diagnosis, a cure promise or general advice the study did not test?

Start with a link to the original study5, rather than a university's name alone. If no link is given, ask for the paper's title, researchers and publication year. Once you find it, look in the abstract for the methods, findings and limits, then compare these with the circulating headline. A source makes checking possible; it does not make every interpretation attached to it correct.

If information is still missing, you can simply wait before sharing the story or acting on it. To discuss it with a care provider, try a specific question: “I read that this programme improves this outcome. Did the study actually measure that, and were its participants similar to me?” Research can then become the start of a conversation instead of a headline becoming a judgment about someone or a rushed health decision.

Frequently Asked Questions

How can I tell whether news about a psychology study is accurate?

Separate the result the researchers found from the advice the news writer added. Ask who took part, what the researchers did, what they actually measured, what limits the finding, and whether the story added a diagnosis or a cure promise. Start with a link to the original study, rather than a university's name alone, then compare the abstract's methods, findings and limits with the circulating headline.

What is the difference between an association and causation in a study?

An association means that two things appeared together in the data; other explanations or unmeasured factors may be involved. An intervention study offers a programme and compares its results with another group, and good design and random assignment help examine causation. So watch the verb in the story: if “associated with” has become “causes” or “guarantees,” that change needs evidence.

Can one question reveal someone's personality?

Not on its own. A 2010 paper by Wood and colleagues found associations between how participants rated others and some of their own traits, but it used multiple ratings and other measures. It did not test a single question for diagnosing the person in front of you. If a colleague says, “I don't trust anyone,” they may be referring to one experience or exaggerating; ask what they mean rather than giving them a mental health label.

Should I change my treatment because of a study in the news?

Do not change a prescribed treatment based on a story about a biological marker. Save the study link and ask your care provider a specific question: “Did the study actually measure that, and were its participants similar to me?” A biological marker can be important for research without automatically proving a benefit people experience. If information is still missing, you can simply wait before acting on it.

Does a study's finding apply to me?

Not automatically. First look at who took part: participant numbers, ages, country, how they were selected, and whether the finding concerns a group or an individual. For example, Spinazzola and colleagues studied children and adolescents referred for trauma services; the finding does not describe all children or, by itself, explain the cause of an adult's current difficulties. Looking for a helpful explanation is different from deciding that one study explains your whole life.

Writing and article review

Alanoud AlturkiWritten byAlanoud Alturki

Content writer and researcher at Tatmeen, writing in Arabic and English on mental health and everyday life topics, including relationships, stress, work, habits, and family.

Tatmeen teamMedical reviewTatmeen team

Every Tatmeen article is reviewed by care providers licensed by the Saudi Commission for Health Specialties, so what you read is accurate and trustworthy.

How we write and reviewSpotted an error? Tell us

This article builds understanding and does not replace a licensed care provider.

Need someone to talk to?

Tatmeen's licensed care providers are available around the clock, and the app's urgent consultation connects you with one within minutes.

Talk to a care provider

In immediate danger?

If you or someone you know is in danger, call an ambulance on 997 or go to the nearest emergency department.

Emergency numbers

Was this article helpful?

Add us to Google
All articles

Talk to a care provider

Your session, remotely and your way: voice, video or text.

  • Licensed by the Saudi Commission for Health Specialties
  • Available around the clock
  • Complete privacy and confidentiality
All care providers

One step for you, start now

Download Tatmeen to explore care providers and booking options.

  • Smart matchingFour quick questions suggest the right care provider
  • Urgent consultationTalk to an available care provider within minutes
  • Free psychological measuresMore than 20 tests to understand how you are doing

Scan to download